Medical insurance payment schemes and patient medical expenses: a cross-sectional study of lung cancer patients in urban China.

BACKGROUND: As the main cause of cancer death, lung cancer imposes seriously health and economic burdens on individuals, families, and the health system. In China, there is no national study analyzing the hospitalization expenditures of different payment methods by lung cancer inpatients. Based on the 2010-2016 database of insured urban resident lung cancer inpatients from the China Medical Insurance Research Association (CHIRA), this paper aims to investigate the characteristics and cost of hospitalized lung cancer patient, to examine the differences in hospital expenses and patient out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses under four medical insurance payment methods: fee-for-service (FFS), per-diem payments, capitation payments (CAP) and case-based payments, and to explore the medical insurance payment method that can be conducive to controlling the cost of lung cancer. METHOD: This is a 2010-2016, 7-year cross-sectional study. CHIRA data are not available to researchers after 2016. The Medical Insurance Database of CHIRA was screened using the international disease classification system to yield 28,200 inpatients diagnosed with lung cancer (ICD-10: C34, C34.0, C34.1, C34.2, C34.3, C34.8, C34.9). The study includes descriptive analysis and regression analysis based on generalized linear models (GLM). RESULTS: The average patient age was 63.4 years and the average length of hospital stay (ALOS) was 14.2 day; 60.7% of patients were from tertiary hospitals; and 45% were insured by FFS. The per-diem payment had the lowest hospital expenses (RMB7496.00/US$1176.87), while CAP had the lowest OOP expenses (RMB1328.18/US$208.52). Compared with FFS hospital expenses, per-diem was 21.3% lower (95% CI = -0.265, -0.215) and case-based payment was 8.4% lower (95% CI = -0.151, -0.024). Compared with the FFS, OOP expenses, per-diem payments were 9.2% lower (95% CI = -0.130, -0.063) and CAP was 15.1% lower (95% CI = -0.151, -0.024). CONCLUSION: For lung cancer patients, per-diem payment generated the lowest hospital expenses, while CAP meant patients bore the lowest OOP costs. Policy makers are suggested to give priority to case-based payments to achieve a tripartite balance among medical insurers, hospitals, and insured members. We also recommend future studies comparing the disparities of various diseases for the cause of different medical insurance schemes.

How provider payment methods affect health expenditure of depressive patients? Empirical study from national claims data in China from 2013 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the associations between provider payment methods and expenditure of depressive patients, stratified by service types and hospital levels. METHODS: We used a 5 % random sample of urban claims data in China (2013-2017), collected by China Health Insurance Research Association. Provider payment methods (fee-for-services, global budget, capitation, case-based and per-diem payments) were the explanatory variables. A generalized linear model was fitted for the associations between provider payment methods and expenditure. All analyses were adjusted for patient"cioeconomic and health-related characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 64,615 depressive patient visits were included, 59,459 for outpatients and 5156 for inpatients. Female patients accounted for 63.00 %. The total and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure significantly differentiated by provider payments. Among outpatient services, when comparing with fee-for-services, capitation payment was associated with substantial marginal reduction in total and OOP expenditure (-$34.18, -$9.71) in primary institutes, yet increases ($27.26, $24.11) in secondary hospitals. Similarly, global budget was associated with lower total and OOP expenditure (-$13.51, -$1.61) in secondary hospitals, while higher total and OOP expenditure ($7.43, $32.27) in tertiary hospitals than fee-for-services. For inpatients, total and OOP expenditures under per-diem (-$857.65, -$283.48) and case-based payments (-$997.93, -$137.56) were remarkably smaller than those under fee-for-services in primary and secondary hospitals, respectively. Besides, case-base payment was only linked with the largest reduction in OOP expense (-$239.39) in inpatient services of tertiary hospitals. LIMITATION: Only urban claims data was included in this study, and investigations for rural population still warrant. And updated data are needed for future studies. CONCLUSIONS: There were varying correlations between provider payment methods and expenditure, which differed by service types and hospital levels. These findings provided empirical evidence for optimizing the mixed payment methods for depression in China.